Posted on 09/23/2009 3:51:29 PM PDT by lightman
I get the same response from my mother when I try to talk to her about this. At eighty years old, she’s not about to leave her friends and the place she “feels God’s presence”. She asked me not to talk to her about it anymore. It makes me sad. She’s a VERY opinionated woman on everything else under the sun, but won’t stand up for the Word on this one.
http://www.alpb.org/forum/index.php?topic=2320.msg118428;topicseen#msg118428
A caveat: I am speaking only for myself here. What follows is purely and simply my oppinion and my oppinion alone.
A further caveat: My congregation, as a congregation of the "ELCA" prays for "our Bishops," Mark (Hanson) and Ralph (Dunkin) every Sunday. We continue to do so, and I have no plans to stop until we either cease being a congregation of the "ELCA" or Mark Hanson no longer occupies the office on the 11th floor of 8765 W. Higgins Road.
That being said: Mark Hanson, for myself, has forfieted the right to be honored with the title "Bishop" much less the honor of "Presiding Bishop." He has not protected the faith of the flock he was entrusted with, preferring to instead be a media figure and a political campaigner. It was precisely under his watch and guidance that the "ELCA" forsook her place in the Church catholic for being merely a sect. He has not lived up to the noble calling to which he was elected.
Mark Hanson may occupy the office space, but he is not worthy of being called, in anything other than derision, "Presiding Bishop." Bishop, coming from the Greek "episcope" means "overseer." I argue that Mark Hanson has abdicated the crucial task of "oversight." I refuse to recognize his oversight any longer.
I don't know what recourse there is, but I would gladly sign a petition to recall Mark Hanson as the "Presiding Bishop" of the "ELCA." Come to think of it, that would be a heckuva memorial for our next Synod Assembly, if I'm around that long...
He can sit in the chair, he may wear the biggest pectoral cross in the room, but none of those things make the man a Bishop. He has failed and failed so spectacularly, that he is not worthy of trust and respect any longer.
And no, my friend Peter, I will not accord him sympathy. Those that care more for their "legacy" than for what is True and Right deserve to be despised rather than trusted. I believe the most pastoral response to Mark would be to gently ask him to see where he can no longer serve and step aside. But he is not interested in either being pastoral nor recieving a pastoral rebuke. Isn't it interesting that the "ELCA's" "Lutheran Center" has not had a chaplain to deal pastorally with the PB and the Churchwide staff?
To my view Mark Hanson has lost the ability to be the "Presiding Bishop" in any substantive way.
Again, just my view on the subject.
Pr. Jerry Kliner, STS
I don't think I can count on all my fingers and toes the number of times he used the leftist catch-phrase "conversation" in this unbiblical piece of excrement. It's the same word used by the homo-nazis who publish the names of those who value and want to protect marriage in its intended and God-ordained manifestation. How does one have a conversation with a blasphemy spewing, God-hating devil?
So far as I am concerned the “conversation” ended when the gavel came down after the votes on August 19 and August 21.
But pray for the hurting and confused, that they may be restored.
It should have ended much earlier than that, if indicators of unbiblical, heretical beliefs are accurate.
AH HA! Typical "progressive" (liberal democrat) speak here.
My heart aches as I listen to the pain and distress of those who feel confused or even abandoned by others
I can't believe this was even in the message. We are NOT confused by your actions. You are confused with your message bishop Hanson.
Not gonna happen as long as the E*?A continues to deny the real life of the church. All this "evangelical and missional" nonsense is a focus on ^our^ works.
They have tried to "confessionalize" Finneyism and lost the battle to the errorists. The E*?A needs to come to understand - once again - God's will regarding Christ's death (absolution) and the role it plays in our salvation.
Too many people think that “progressive” means “liberal.” A dictionary defintion of “progressive” is “doing something to achieve progress.” Progress is determined by each person’s opinions.
Well, I made that statement since the left likes to refer to themselves as “progressives” and consider us as backward hicks or rednecks.
IIRC, Finney preached that man could overcome sin through his own will, and that Adam's sin was not man's sin per se. I don't see this as the ELCA's approach here. They're saying the sin of homosexuality isn't a sin at all since homosexuals can become ordained servants of God and take the Sacraments.
I'm not that knowledgeable about Finney, but I suspect he'd still consider homosexuality a sin (i.e. moral depravity), but man has the ability to live a Godly life and can overcome sin on his own; at least that's my take of him.
The E*?A needs to come to understand - once again - God's will regarding Christ's death (absolution) and the role it plays in our salvation.
I don't see that happening. I don't see Hanson taking a step back. He has too much invested, and too many have his ear to backtrack now. The ELCA has made its bed. What hopefully will happen is that those against this heresy will break from the heretical Church and build God's house apart from the ELCA; whether through transfer into strong doctrinal bodies or the creation of their own.
by “confessionalize” Finneyism I meant that they adopted the works righteousness of Finney’s proseltyzing (go and SAAAAAAAAAVVVVVVVVE the heathens) and then tried to mask it with Lutheran-sounding words.
Would someone who’s going please ask the Right Honorable Bishop to explain why Jesus would make one rule in Matthew 19:4-5, and then think He’d be OK telling people:
“Jesus did in fact say that man and woman (not man and man, woman and woman, man and pet, or man and boy) are joined, and when joined by God, let no man put asunder, but we voted and decided to teach you all to ignore JUST THIS BIT of the Bible and do what we say instead.”
God may have broken many of the rules that men set forth, but He’s never broken any of His own rules.
I’d like to see what guidance ELCA is going to come out with in teaching this ‘new version’ of the Bible to children. It’s the question I’ve asked my pastors.
OK, gotcha!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.